Tag Archives: Boris Johnson

1095 minus one

I’ve had some questions. Some are about my state of delusion, some are on my mental state and some are actually interesting. How I got there, what my evidence is. As I stated, it is highly speculative, but I got there, so how did I get there?

The Montgolfier principle
Think of the world as a balloon. There is the balloon with oxygen, it keeps us up, there are the burners and there is the basket. The burners are the Forrests, they provide oxygen for the balloon that keeps us up, as oxygen is added, CO2 is removed, the buoyancy of the balloon goes up. The basket holds all the people, as there are more people, more oxygen in the balloon is required. This is the most rudimentary of settings. To see the impact we need to consider the two stages that we have been exposed to. The burners are 33% smaller, as one third of all forests are gone. So the burners heed to be cranked up, but that is not possible, the trees work at a set speed, there is little we can do to change that. In the last 25 years, as the forests got cut down, the population grew by 38%, the basket got up to 38% more heavy. So as the balloon has less oxygen and more people, it will sink, we will die. You want an upside? There isn’t one at present, not until the politicians actually achieve something. Agreements, talks and compliments do not do anything and the members of COP26 are all about that, until they achieve and actually do something they deserve nothing. 

I might have oversimplified things, but the Montgolfier principle holds up. It is not accurate, it is not defining, but it gives you the story you need to hear. Even as I made comments on the research by McGill University, it is an event that matters. It will be harder to regrow the trees we chopped down. 

At present we see the news giving us Boris Johnson on the need for an ambitious agreement, it sounds nice but talking in the next 2 years whilst the nations halt and await actions is a much larger problem. Somewhere between 50,000,000 and 80,000,000 are needed to be planted in the next 2 years to give us some level of oxygen level change in the next 10 years. Did people forget that growing a tree will take that long? It takes decades to grow what is cut down in days. We might see the setting of Indonesia, but they are not alone. Brazil is in an equal place and as deforestation continues for another 8 years, there is every chance that the forests will have diminished to a total of 50%, so what do you think will happen to the balloon? I might actually live long enough having to pay for oxygen, not something I expected when I went to primary school. There we were told that the sun and the air was free, we were being lied to (it was a truth at the time). We screwed up our planet to that extent and we are all equally guilty, we remained inactive. Some sources give us that global warming are about to set at 2.4 degrees, I believe it will be much more towards 4 degrees, time will tell who is right, the setting of 1.5 degrees is no longer achievable, not as deforestation continues optionally at increased speed for another 8 years. Then we will get excuses from Indonesia and Brazil who need to protest the rights of the people and there we have it. We have the setting of non-action for a few more years and we have so much time left.

They all have something to say, none of them are acting. Consider over the next 6 months, how many nations will have planted trees, not in space, not in expected numbers, but in ACTUAL NUMBERS. What are the chances that the total will not even amount to 5,000,000 trees when 500% of that should be required? 

And as the media is silencing a few more items we will soon forget about all of this, that is the reality of it all and when pneumonia becomes the number one killer again, what will you say? It is due to hearts diseases are better managed? Cancer has a less deadly curve or will you realise that we have more problems, not less. I leave it up to you to make up your own mind.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Politics, Science

Fake it till you break it

I have been twisting and turning on this. This is not really my cup of tea, so I was happy to let it slide by. But then three things happened. In the first there were two stories, there was actually a third one, but I could not retrieve it. Then there was a tweet. Apparently the Glasgow COP had dignitaries at the scene, as such well over a dozen cars were running on idle during THE ENTIRE DAY, so how is that for the environment? But I digress. It was the second article, the one starting with ‘Thunberg tells Glasgow protest politicians are pretending’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-59116611) that pushed me on. You see, she is right and I will hand over what I personally believe to be evidence over to you and I will let you decide. The article gives us “She told fellow activists from “Fridays for Future” that change would not come from politicians at the summit but from individuals showing leadership. The Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior was sailing up the Clyde, with plans to dock near the conference venue”, the article is almost a day old, I had been fighting with myself on this for a day. So it is the first article that was the tide setter. The article ‘World leaders promise to end deforestation by 2030’ started the trouble. This link is an hour old, but there was an earlier story. This article is at https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59088498. You see, if they were sincere about doing something, the promise would not be for 2030 when most of these losers would be out of office, it would realistically set to January 1st 2023, that would have been real, that would have been a decent mark towards some victory. But the greed driven need to capture whatever they can, mainly because some analyst in Wall Street seems to have given that deadline. So when we are given “warned a previous deal in 2014 had “failed to slow deforestation at all” and commitments needed to be delivered on” and no amount of posturing as is seen with “UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who is hosting the global meeting in Glasgow, said “more leaders than ever before” – a total of 110 – had made the “landmark” commitment” is nothing more than a joke, a joke optionally forgotten by January 1st 2029, when most signatories are no longer in office and a landmark adjustment is made towards 2035, optionally 2038. I reckon that Greta Thunberg is right, they are merely pretending. I wonder how many of them have sold whatever they had at the coastline. So we can think whatever we want, but the person making the statement “end the role of humanity as nature’s conqueror, and instead become nature’s custodian” could be dead before that moment arrives. In this I find the response from Dr Nigel Sizer, the ecologist the most disappointing one “But maybe this is realistic and the best that they can achieve”, their best is not even close to acceptable, not in the cases we are seeing now. And in all this, I saw no commitment or actionable signs from China, the one who is still the alleged number one polluter. As far as some papers go, China made no commitments, one source gave us ‘no new commitments’, but so far (or as far as I can see) China hasn’t done anything in the old setting either. 

Where do we go from here?
I honestly do not know, the idea of culling the human population by 97.3% is still on the table as far as I can tell and if that happens, I will not be around for commentary, The super enabled will be part of the surviving 2.7% and in light of how drastic the situation might be, that is as good as it will get. And it is already starting. The Guardian gave us yesterday ‘Do not trust Brazil’s ‘greenwashing’ promises, say Amazon activists’, so the COP hasn’t even ended and the doubts are flying all over the field. So far it seems that a teenager named Greta Thunberg is seemingly a lot closer to the mark than any current or previous environmental editor in any newspaper. And when you realise that part, how much were the cost of meetings that go nowhere, because you the taxpayer paid for all that. And my skepticism is not unique. Elon Musk gave (via ABC News) the headline ‘Elon Musk offers $US6 billion to UN World Food Programme if it can prove it’ll end world hunger’, the UN, Environmental agencies, they have become the laughing stock for players in Wall Street play the delay game. Should you doubt that, consider the stage of full deforestation until 2030, that whilst an attempt was made in 2014, it failed and the so called critics with ‘it was voluntary’ is useless. It shows that governments need to fill their pockets, it is the need for greed and the setting where the population gets to One (see previous article). By 2019, 5 years after the ‘promise’ nearly all have failed. Russia and a few others weren’t part of this, but do they have to? If we cannot see the dangers we are facing it doesn’t matter what Russia does, we merely no longer deserve to live, hip hip hurrah to Wall Street. 

We can look at it from all the angles, but in the end it is all about fictive promises that will not be held by those in office when it counts, it will not set the stage of promises that are broken again and again. If they had set the promise towards January 1st 2023 when most would still be in office it is one thing, 2030 is just a joke, but as things go I will not live long enough to see that date come, so whomever is alive then, make sure that these politicians are held to account and if needed let EVERY newspaper print a page every day with the shame list of those who attended COP26 and were unable to keep their word. I reckon it will not happen, because it will stop business agreements and space for advertisements will be lost, and Wall Street wins again. 

Perhaps this will wake you up, in a stage of greed there is one winner, it is the ‘me-stage’ we face and that stage will not be defeated, it comes from the push and the reality that greed is eternal. 

P.S. WordPress still hasn’t fixed colours, I hope to find an alternative soon.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

A disregarded shelter setting

The Guardian was at it again and they are not doing anything wrong (at least I think they aren’t) but the stage created is calling for a nice stage and it is getting close to immediate that we take a hard look at the meaning of hypocrisy. 

The article ‘Pandora papers: biggest ever leak of offshore data exposes financial secrets of rich and powerful’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/03/pandora-papers-biggest-ever-leak-of-offshore-data-exposes-financial-secrets-of-rich-and-powerful) gives us a few items and before you think we are digging into the air, lets take a look at a few essential parts. It starts with “companies hired by wealthy clients to create offshore structures and trusts in tax havens such as Panama, Dubai, Monaco, Switzerland and the Cayman Islands” first, this is not an illegal act, then we need to look at Monaco and Dubai. Monaco gives us over two sources “You can apply for a Carte de Residence once you have an address in Monaco (either bought or rented a property for a minimum of a year). You must also agree to live there for more than three months of the year. Resident individuals are not subject to personal income tax in the Principality of Monaco”, now this is not the easiest setting as decent apartments tend to start at €3,000,000 going up to €387,000,000. As such I wish you good luck finding something you like. In Dubai we see “There is currently no personal income tax in the United Arab Emirates. As such, there are no individual tax registration or reporting obligations.” These are called tax havens and they are perfectly legal. It is the way THAT nation operates and it works for them, so when we see the Guardian give us “But the secrecy offered by tax havens has at times proven attractive to tax evaders, fraudsters and money launderers, some of whom are exposed in the files”, which is a debatable setting. You see someone who takes effort in buying an apartment in Monaco or Dubai, or most of these places is not a tax evader, that person is involved with tax avoidance and it is not the same. Black letter lawyers found a setting where the rules work FOR their clients and they are allowed to do this. Yet the Guardian inserts ‘tax evader’ whilst knowingly adding “some of whom are exposed in the files”, some implying not all and some is seemingly inserted hoping that the people are flamed to the list of “more than 100 billionaires, 30 world leaders and 300 public officials” hoping that they are all painted by the flamed audience. And in light of this, did anyone take a long hard look at “the cache includes 11.9m files from companies hired by” what is not looked at is the source of that information and how that source got the information. A setting not dissimilar from my article ‘The same gramophone’ on September 16th (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/09/16/the-same-gramophone/) regarding Pegasus and in light of evidence given (lack thereof) to the people by the Washington Post an interesting repetition of flames lacking evidence. The article on tax issues does not once, NOT ONCE mention tax avoidance, or give the setting of tax evasion versus tax avoidance. One is illegal the other is not. In this the text “They also shine a light on the secret finances of more than 300 other public officials such as government ministers, judges, mayors and military generals in more than 90 countries” could be seen as “They also shine a light on the private finances of more than 300 other public officials such as government ministers, judges, mayors and military generals in more than 90 countries”, yet they chose to not use the word Private did they? Private and non evidence could be seen as intrusive and harassing, the media really does not like it when their actions are seen in that way. 

My view?
You see if there was clear ‘tax evasion’ we would be getting this, instead of “leaked data with select media partners including the Guardian, BBC Panorama, Le Monde and the Washington Post. More than 600 journalists have sifted through the files as part of a massive global investigation”, so are they incompetent or is there too little remaining? The price of 600 journalists cannot be cheap so the more they flame, the more they ‘earn’ back, but that part is not really given is it? There is no top-line, a flaw we have seen more than once before. If it was clear 300 people can be shown in a top-line like Nation, government, non government easily enough. That would take an hour, perhaps two, but we do not get to see that, do we? We also get all kinds of embossed examples, with the added text “This is the Panama papers on steroids, it’s broader, richer and has more detail”, my view would be, then give it Ryle you dumb fuck! Do not posture, present facts! The top-line, the setting of tax evasion versus tax avoidance and a few other facts, including the source of the data, but we do not get any of that, do we?

I see it as a mere approach to the upcoming US debt ceiling and someone flaming that if ‘they’ had paid their taxes, there would not be an issue. Well, my view “Well, you stupid fucks, if you had clearly focussed on the tax laws that needed an overhaul for THREE DECADES we might not be in this mess either!” So whilst we are given “The files include disclosures about major donors to the Conservative party, raising difficult questions for Boris Johnson as his party meets for its annual conference”, an anti-tory smear setting. No matter who donates and to what party, if these people are not proven criminals, there would be no issue and I wonder how far these 600 journalists got. So when we consider “Many use shell companies to hold luxury items such as property and yachts, as well as incognito bank accounts” we need to see whether laws were broken and let’s be clear, they stated that these are people in over 90 countries. So which have laws against these acts and if they have an address in Monaco or Dubai, are any laws broken? This took me 5 minutes and we see a lack of a lot in one article seemingly the source of 600 journalists. 

I personally see only one option for a person like Gerard Ryle. Either give us that top-line clearly or become an Uber driver. As I personally see it, someone posturing absent of evidence should be somewhere else, not be some director of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, but that is merely my call on the matter we see here now.

Oh, and before I forget the meaning of Hypocrisy is “the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case”, a setting too many journalists fall into lately.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

How stupid are we?

Yes, let’s come with a question that optionally offends us all straight from the barn, because we deserve to be asked the hard questions. I have been accused of being ‘all’ pro Saudi, all ‘pro’ China and why? You see, two players (US and UK) have a product, OK the USA less so, if you ignore 900 flaws and that would be fine, but then the US gives the KSA ban after ban and for no good reason, merely a morel approach whilst the opponents of the KSA are not held to ANY standard. So, if I see an option to make 3.75% from $11,000,000,000 I will do so. Australia is not in a war with China. Now, as a commonwealth citizen I would have preferred to sell the KSA the UK solution, but here we see that the UK is as stupid as the US and they all listen to the wrong people and they are now losing out on billions, billions THEIR government coffers desperately need (the US needs them as well, but I remain a commonwealth citizen, so fuck ‘em). And China has a product and personally so does Russia, but in that equation I would prefer to ‘sell’ the Chinese solution. There are no morals, this was all about common sense (and me getting a few coins in light of an upcoming retirement event).

Now was it good, was it bad? It is neither, a buying party needs their nation safer (KSA) and the USA and UK have an issue with that, so along comes a valid alternative (China) and so I take a gander being the courier here. 

That does not mean that others are not to be held by standards and that is where we are. You see Al Jazeera (at https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2021/9/15/what-could-an-evergrande-debt-default-mean-for-china-and-beyond) is giving us the stage where we see ‘What could an Evergrande debt default mean for China and beyond?’ And the stage is not a small one, the debt is now at $300,000,000,000. It is larger than the national budget for quite a few nations. I am wondering, was no one awake when we were confronted with the utter stupidity of a place called Interserve Plc? Oh, and only earlier this year we were fed ‘Interserve Construction suffers £108m loss’, and that was not even the worst. In March we get ‘Losses from Interserve’s energy-from-waste disaster top £300m’, did no one catch on and after we had the Lehman brothers, the Dutch SNS bank who relied on ‘We are too big to fail, we now see Ever Grande and the risk of running short on $300,000,000,000 which looks like a thousand times worse than Interserve, now Tilbury Douglas and the hard times are nowhere near over. Yes, the board of directors will fill their pockets on the way out and I reckon that Hui Ka Yan and his $11,000,000,000 plus fortune will not face the danger of hunger any day soon. Now, whatever China does is up to China, yet I believe that the setting of “Evergrande currently has 1,300 real estate projects in 280 cities in China” shows that there is a larger need for governments to step in, especially when we are confronted with “the real estate developer may not be able to make the interest payments on some of its $300bn in liabilities next week and could also miss a principal payment on at least one of its loans”, I personally never believed that there is anything like ‘Too big to fail’, just offer some of these contracts and the payments to their competitors and see what happens. So even as Hui Ka Yan believed in the alternative Tom Cruise with “I feel the need, the need for greed” there is a larger station, we do know that governments tend to be a lot more stupid then people, but there are well over half a dozen examples of stupidity, did no one catch on? And here we need to take notice that people are on average as stupid as the average of the total amount of stupid people. Yet governments and companies doe not share that. They are as stupid as the sum of all the people working for them and that tends to be a lot worse. According to Deutsche Welle it is already there. With “Some 1.5 million people have put deposits on new homes that have yet to be built” (at https://www.dw.com/en/evergrande-why-the-chinese-property-giant-is-close-to-collapse/a-59175953) we see a setting where a place like San Diego, California where every person in that city loses ALL of their lifetime savings, it is that bad and we tend to wonder what will any government do, I wonder how these people will not lose everything. This is not some collection of shareholders, this is a stage where 1,500,000 people become optionally homeless overnight, it is a lot worse and it could hit the Chinese economy in a few ways and as some people sit hiding behind their dark shades, nodding and state “We feel the need, the need for greed”, all whilst the cadavers of circumstance pile up. When will governments learn that there is a need for oversight, especially when the impact is THAT big. So whilst we take notice of “Evergrande has expanded into other areas of the economy, including food, life insurance, tv/film and leisure”, can anyone explain to me why a property giant was even allowed in food and life insurance? Never mind the bollocks (aka: the 122nd largest group in the world by revenue, according to the 2021 Fortune Global 500 List), too many are heralding and applauding stupidity and greed. As such I feel perfectly fine trying to be the courier between two parties grabbing a decent coin in the process. Oh, and as the Chinese government is seeing what is rolling their way, the KSA deal might be one that diminishes the impact of Evergrande, so whilst we see three people (Biden, Johnson and Morrison) plot to become a new world power by handing nuclear submarines to Australia, all whilst we know that this is merely setting a stage to strut around like peacocks, no one is looking how much more Australian defence budgets will get with nuclear submarines in the mix, all whilst they still need to realise the impact of the F-35 folly. As such I wonder who is aware of what will be left to other people past 2035 when the defence budget will require a 45%-61% top up. I believe in defence as much as the next person, so whilst we accept “Last month the Australian government signed a $50 billion contract with the French company DCNS to build 12 new submarines”, do you think that such a contract will not come without cost? Yet here too (source: ABC News) we are told that “that program has come with delays and blowouts, and would have delivered conventional diesel-electric submarines, like the Collins Class”, so at least there is a decent reason and it makes sense, but still, there is a larger concern, not the coming of nuclear subs, but the realisation that Australia has an antiquated submarine stage and it does need to take care of 2,137,000 meters of beach front property, something needs to be done and that is good, I do not object.

Australian Navy too small

I merely wonder (at times) why it took this long in the first place. When we dig deeper we see why the US wants it because the foundation of nuclear submarines need to be build there, which makes me a bit hesitant after the failures that the F-35 (with 900 design flaws) as well as the failure that the Zumwalt class represents (at $21,000,000,000), the US wants to shout that this will be a success, but I have concerns and fortunately I do have a degree in ships engineering (which I never used). The larger stage is seen but so far governments are seemingly deaf as their irresponsible teenagers (aka politicians) are living off someone else’s credit card and there is the rub, there is the danger. They all live by the rule “We are too big to fail” and China is seemingly no different, its corporate greed is just like all the other greed driven players. So whilst a few players are trying to push the borders, we need to consider what happens when someone in that pool of overspending delusional players panics, because that will be the ball game when things escalate and explode in all our faces. 

How stupid are we to not loudly protest as corporations and governments remain absent in actions, especially when there is a $300,000,000,000 issue? Why was there no action when the danger was a mere $5,000,000,000? Even for China 300 billion is too much and when did we see a positive outcome when that much money was lost? I do not remember any positive impact. Not in 2004, not in 2007 and this time around it will be no different. Yet when the amount is that big it will impact a lot more people, all over the globe. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics

The same gramophone

It started over a month ago with ‘From horse to course’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/07/23/from-horse-to-course/) there we saw the attack and the debatability on some of the presented evidence. Today we see (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/sep/15/eu-poised-to-tighten-privacy-laws-after-pegasus-spyware-scandal) ‘EU commissioner calls for urgent action against Pegasus spyware’ and it would make sense, until we get to “The investigation was based on forensic analysis of phones and analysis of a leaked database of 50,000 numbers”, so in well over a month there are no top-line statistics? The list was attacked by a few well over a month ago, but here we see the Guardian, specifically Daniel Boffey hash over the same stage with nothing to show for it, so is he what some might call ‘a fucking tool’ for stakeholders or a wannabe journalist? Consider that we pretty much get the same details we saw in my article and these parts came from the BBC and the Guardian’s own article from last July. That article gave us “NSO has said Macron was not a “target” of any of its customers, meaning the company denies he was selected for surveillance using its spyware, saying in multiple statements that it requires its government clients to use its powerful spying tools only for legitimate investigations into terrorism or crime”, so whilst we now see “analysis of a leaked database of 50,000 numbers, including that of the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and European Council president, Charles Michel”. So did Daniel forget to do his homework or was he acting on the needs of a stakeholder? I actually do not know, hence I ask here. The largest failing is that the Guardian gives us some emotional charged article and no homework was done, there is no top-line on the nations involved with the 50,000 phone numbers. All whilst I also showed (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/07/28/retry-or-retrial/) a few days later when The Verge got involved that 50,000 numbers imply a cost of no less than $400,000,000 which is still not looked at, so why is the Guardian (BBC too) this unable to perform? In that article ‘Retry or retrial?’ We see the Verge giving us “The Washington Post says that the list is from 2016” and that journalist no one cares about was still alive. A setting that is seemingly overlooked by TWO news organisations and none of them vetted information through a top-line which is what I would have done first. So how many of these numbers are EU numbers? How many are in France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Germany or Sweden? In over a month neither newsagent got that part done and if the Verge is to be believed the 2016 list without a top-line shows newsagents to be massively incompetent. 

Added here we see the added part “A consortium of 17 media outlets, including the Guardian, revealed in July that global clients of the Israeli surveillance firm NSO Group had used hacking software to target human rights activists, journalists and lawyers”, that part negated is that the NSO group is a service branch towards governments on the tracking of criminals and terrorists. This caper costs a government “$500,000 for an extra 50 phones” (source: The Verge) all whilst the entire list represents a minimum value of $400 million. So which governments spend that much on these numbers and when you consider that it was a list of governments, we see additional info that the leaked list is a fictive list, there is no leak that hands the phone lists of all these governments and that is before we consider that one number might be on several lists. Consider that both Macron and Johnson want to know where Merkel gets her lingerie (ha ha ha). OK, that was a funny, but the setting is valid, there is a genuine need for several governments to keep track of a person and when we consider that I could have made a top-line within a week (depending on how the data looks) why did the Guardian and the BBC not succeed? Why do they not have any reference to the leaked list being a 2016 list? 

Also in the end we see the Guardian give us “NSO says it “does not operate the systems that it sells to vetted government customers, and does not have access to the data of its customers’ targets”” when we consider that we see more debatable sides to a list of 50,000, we see the lack of actions for well over a month (almost 2 months) and at no stage do we see any clear allegations against any government apart for some mention of Hungary, all whilst the top-line results could have pointed the finger at someone. Do you actually believe that the UAE or Saudi Arabia have any interest in a Dutch Human rights activist? At the prices that the NSO charges, I very much doubt it. 

So here I stand asking the Guardian (and specifically Daniel Boffey) what on earth do you think you are doing? Who are you serving, because the lack of evidence and lack of clear verifiable data implies you are not doing this for the readers, if that were true the article would have looked very different.

2 Comments

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

One sided media

We are falling for another one sided attack on the people, pretending to talk for the people, but what is going on? To be honest, less than a day ago I did not really care, but now things are changing and not for the good. It might have started yesterday, but the setting ‘UK government may legislate to stop European Super League, says minister’ makes it a larger issue. Let’s be clear, I checked several sources and they all attack the European Super League, not one, I say again NOT ONE gives us a clear timeline and the other side. So when I saw ‘FIFA voices disapproval of proposed breakaway European Super League plan’ with the added “warning they must face up to the reality of their decision”, yes just like the consequences of large settings of corruption by FIFA, in this, FIFA needs to keep its mouth shut! We get some information (at https://acmilan.theoffside.com/2021/4/19/22391526/official-ac-milan-is-one-of-the-founding-members-of-the-european-super-league-uefa-fifa-lega-serie-a) yet the news groups give us nothing, merely wave after wave of negativity. It makes me wonder where their interests lie and personally I think it is whomever has the most money. 

So the setting where we are informed is not coming, merely politicians shouting, media flaming and no real information. I voiced yesterday that this might be the consequence of unadulterated expansionism and I personally feel that it might be a larger reason, yes more money for the owners might play a role, but when I see “20 participating clubs with 15 Founding Clubs and a qualifying mechanism for a further five teams to qualify annually based on achievements in the prior season” gives view to a competitive side, all whilst several sources give voice in the setting like “The joy of the game’s current structure, one that has kept people coming back year after year, generation after generation, is that even the most seemingly endless period of frustration is made bearable by the possibility, however remote, that one day you could see them rise up”, yes you might voice it that way, yet ‘joy of the game’s current structure’ also implies the funds as they are ‘distributed’ now, as these teams fall away, advertisements will take a different tour, a tour that the power people are not happy about, and such they are all crying. If there was a real concern for the people, there would be neutral interviews with the owners of these breakaway teams. Do you think that people will NOT watch AC Milan-Real Madrid? Do you think that the fans of these two teams are shutting their eyes? No! But media money will now take a different path and the media is crying like a little bitch taking the lames as far as they can, because that has worked so often in the past. 

Is this league a good idea? I do not know, I do not really care about football, but I do know that there is a limit to expansionism and greed driven people will never accept the term ‘saturation’. A stage larger and larger in football, with well over 90 teams in Europe? Yup, you are looking at 4000 minutes per weekend, all that time for advertisement, all the media vying for those coins. None of that is mentioned. Yet we get “Now, more than ever, we must protect the entire football community – from the top level to the grassroots – and the values of competition and fairness at its core”. Fairness?  Are you freaking kidding me? Real Madrid has an estimated budget of 616 million Euro. You really think that Dutch PSV, German Werder Bremen, or British Newcastle United has anywhere near that level of budget? As I see it for FIFA and UEFA this will be about loss of revenue and we need to see this clearly, but the media cannot be trusted, they have too much to lose. You see if they were fair, their would be a clear interview with those breakaway teams, but I see nothing of that. And it gets to be worse, when these teams breakaway, the bulk of all football fans, they will switch to that channel, that is the fear and I believe that if FIFA had cleaned house half a decade ago and stopped expansionism things would not be that bad, it is the clear consequence on what I see as unadulterated greed. The denial of saturated sport venues. Let’s be clear, do you have time and the drive to watch 4000 minutes of soccer every weekend? We know, the ‘smaller’ teams will get a fragmented highlight expose, with the fill match on some other channel (for the local fans), but the breakaway groups are a massive drain on funds. There is no mention of that, is there? We get headlines like ‘European Super League planners condemned as ‘snakes’ by UEFA chief Aleksander Ceferin’, with quotes like “he hoped UEFA could ban Super League clubs and players “as soon as possible” from all of its competitions”, “Betrayal was a theme Ceferin was to return to frequently as he denounced the 12 clubs as “the dirty dozen”” and “I have seen many things in my life. I was a criminal lawyer. I have never seen people like that,” he said, “It is hard to believe the level of immorality of some people”, well as we saw the unquestioned actions by a certain FIFA member, his words are hollow and meaningless, fear mongering in the hope to turn things around, but the crux remains expansionism and the media have too large a slice of that cake and the media is not making any serious effort in giving us a real interview of the breakaway teams, and with real I do mean an interview where they give us THEIR side. And in all this, it is the interview of Ceferin in 2019, where we see “The two finalists, Arsenal and Chelsea, were only able to allocate 6,000 tickets each to their supporters. Plus, fans wanting to attend the final have to make a long and expensive journey”, so that is one side, but according to what I saw, we see that Stamford Bridge stadium has 40,834 places, so what happened to the other 25,000 seats? I get it, others want to see it too, but shouldn’t the fans of these two teams have a much larger share of the tickets? As such, who got the lion share of the ‘allocated’ tickets? Perhaps it is all on the up and up, but the stadium would prefer to give ITS fans a much larger share, and Ceferin gives us 6,000 seats. There is a lot more going on and all these funds from the breakaway teams are up for grabs, as are the media contracts, which are now not covered, making the media cry like little bitches. And as we see Boris Johnson give us “has promised football groups that the government will consider using what he called “a legislative bomb” to stop English clubs joining a breakaway European Super League, as official efforts to thwart the plan were stepped up” (source: the Guardian) With all due respect, how the fuck is that any of your business? This is not political, the media, UEFA, FIFA and the advertisers are making this political, which is not the same. 

Sports is one place where the nanny state mentality (social equality) will never ever work and in that stage expansionism is not the solution, it never ever was and now that there is a group of upper league teams, the stage is set. As I see it, it is the consequence of greed, is it not interesting that the media is not picking up on that either, they pick up on greed as a stone to throw towards the European Super League. I am not stating that this is not the case, cash might be involved, but I reckon it is more about FIFA and UEFA losing out, then the ESL is gaining. It is my view, and I might be wrong, I will admit to that, but the lack of neutral media makes me doubt that I am wrong, I still might be, I get that.

But consider the news, the accusation and the flames, all whilst we see no decent response offered by the other side. This might just be another example of filtered information, filtered to the needs of the big three. Shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers. It is merely my point of view on the matter.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

EOYS (End Of Year Stage)

We are all in a stage where we try to make sense of the choices we made over the last year. For some it is the elections, for some it is Brexit, for some it is COVID, and others have other matters, mot of us will have a blend of all, and nearly all will have COVID in the equation. So when I stated in earlier articles that the lockdown is to some degree pointless, we are hereby given the setting in ‘Woman on super-yacht that arrived in Cairns one of two people in Queensland with COVID-19’ (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-24/coronavirus-queensland-super-yacht-woman-northern-beaches-man/13010536) where we see “She said the crew of the Lady E, which sailed to Australia from the Maldives, was not being helpful with contact tracing information. But the ship’s captain, James Kennedy, said in a statement that he and his crew were complying with all requests”, as such I see the opposites ‘not being helpful with contact tracing information’, as well as ‘he and his crew were complying with all requests’. Infection finds  way, there will always be someone that escapes attention because some people ‘forgot’ to look in that direction. Then we also get ‘cluster grows by nine local cases in NSW after a record 60,000 tests’, so after an additional 1% of the population of Sydney is tested up to 9 new cases are found, and people still debate and oppose that the disease will find a way? So are there still 900 unconfirmed cases in Sydney, and if that is the case, if that confirmation comes in 2-3 days, how many more will have the disease then? It is a real setting, a realistic fear and an absolute realistic case of worry. 

Yes, I worry, but some set worry into a larger stage of fear, which is a wrong stage to fill, there is every chance that that I might get it and the percentage is that there is a 3% chance I might die. Yet the truth is that there is a 97% chance I will not, good odds, especially compared to a lottery ticket, or blindfolded crossing the road on regent street. And others are debating, or they are agreeing that electing a stupid fat guy into the White House, the only man on planet with a haircut worse than Boris Johnson (Prime Minister of the United Kingdom) was not the greatest idea anyone could have had. Even as a Republican I agree. I would diplomatically state it as “John McCain would have been 20 times the President that President Trump ever could be, even dead he would still be 20 times the President that this current President could ever hope to be”. This is the stage that the US had signed up for and whatever gains they made in the middle east, pardoning the sentences of the Blackwater guards will have larger repercussions, as I see it the president is making sure that the US will have no forwards momentum the next 4 years, a stupid person, driven by self-righteous motives like “If I cannot be president, no one can” is setting a long term stage where nothing can be resolved, and in this people still wonder why I was considering selling my IP to a Chinese based corporation?  

We are in the end of year stage, but there is close to zero positivity to show, in that stage, as negativity adds up and up to the floor foundation of what we perceive to be some sort of balance, the setting of balance becomes increasingly distasteful. Consider the stage where we see “Slatten, whom prosecutors said started the shooting, was sentenced to life in prison” (source: NPR) gives rise to the stage where government shielded mass murder is now OK, that is how it reads, for the record, I never looked into the matter, I never saw any of the evidence and I read none of the testimonies, yet a court of law found them guilty and so far I have not seen any legal evidence that absolves them. There was a trial and a re-trial, as such I wonder why any president would involve themselves in this manner, and as I personally see it there is a scorched earth approach, which is “a military founded strategy that aims to destroy anything that might be useful to the enemy. Any assets that could be used by the enemy may be targeted, which usually includes obvious weapons, transport vehicles, communication sites, and industrial resources”, a set stage of diplomacy that has consequences, and as I personally see it, President Trump has now inflicted more damage on the United States than Edward Snowden ever has. When we see these actions as well as his reaction to the COVID-19 mess, when the people tally the reported 18,946,472 infected and the 334,824 who died, we see a scary setting by possibly the worst president in American History. And I need to give a clear stage on ‘the reported’, if the UK is in a stage where 3% has been infected, there is every chance that the infections, the reported and the unreported ones, will add up to (speculatively speaking) a little over 32 million making the stage that up to 10% of the US population is infected and matters will get worse soon enough. 

There is a speculative (sort of) wisdom to this, consider that 23% of ALL global infections are in the USA, yet less than 0.01% of the fatalities are shown, we see an unbalanced equation, this is not about age, or better healthcare, this is a setting that is far too unbalanced to make sense, a disease is not intelligent, it is an engine, it travels, infects and moves on, so if one number is one thing and if we agree that 2 out of 3 will make a complete recovery, the numbers are not adding up, optionally the numbers are on a few levels bogus. I remain open to which is which and what is actually happening. But I can give you thins, the numbers are not adding up and that setting is out in the open for anyone to see. 

So whilst we wonder hat is what and which is which, consider that there is a set level, there is at all times some level of discrepancy, there always will be, but for numbers to be off by 98%, that is what I call a numerical and statistical impossibility.

And when we see how the stage is in NSW (Australia) and people on yachts dump infected people in Queensland, consider just how many ships there are and how much infected people are travelling to places where we apparently have no control over the situation, so how many yachts are there in California and Florida, how many in the Mediterranean and how many of them remain unchecked? As such, what will the infected numbers be by on December 29th, January 29th and February 29th, I wonder if there will be any indictments soon thereafter. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

The image we are offered

Yup, it happens, we all have an image of a person. Not in any good or bad way, just an image of how we have seen him the most. In my case, this reflects on Eminem. The rapper has been part of my music appreciation life for around two decades. It started with the Marshall Mathers LP, which I bought because I liked the song Stan. The album brought a lot more than merely one song, and I’ll be honest, I didn’t get parts of it, I am not an American, the issues he sings about are issues I never witnessed or faced. I bought 4 albums and over the years I lost sight of his music. Not intentional, the world is filled with music and I try to learn as much as I can. So when I saw him looking like a F1 racer with beard and all, I took a step back. As I took note of ‘Eminem criticises non-mask wearers on new rap track’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/jul/10/eminem-criticises-non-mask-wearers-on-new-rap-track-kid-cudi-covid-19) I learned of “Eminem has entered the debate about face masks in a collaboration with Kid Cudi, tackling an issue that is the subject of fierce disagreement in the US and UK”, and the lyrics are set to the spice of Eminem (read: less subtle in bringing the message) and as we see ““Bunch of halfwits up in office. Half of us walking around like a zombie apocalypse. Other half are just pissed off and don’t want to wear a mask and they’re just scoffin’. And that’s how you end up catchin’ the shit off ’em. I just used the same basket as you shoppin’, now I’m in a fuckin’ casket from you coughin’.”” Is the direct approach. They are not wrong, but the fact that this situation has been brought to rap and the Guardian voices that in another way by stating “Eminem’s lines are a long way from any that the Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, would ever use but they articulate similar sentiments.” It is a global scene and in light of 200+ doctors now giving nice to the fact that Covid-19 is airborne sheds a different light on the matter. We see politicians making light (to some extent) of the situation, yet the story does not reflect the death toll. And team Eminem-Kid Cudi are alerting us to a much harder reality. So whilst we see a correlation between US and UK politics, we get to see  Downing Street has faced questions about why more cabinet ministers are not wearing masks. There have been no public sightings of Boris Johnson wearing a face covering, while the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, was pictured serving food to customers at Wagamama with nothing on his face but a grin.” If presentation is key in issues, we see the failing of politicians to a much larger degree and when the population starts taking heed of team Eminem-Kid Cudi whilst removing politicians from the circle of trust and belief, we could state that the shit has truly hit the fan. 

I applaud the move that these two have made, social awareness tends to be more easily embraced through music and the issue is important. And when we see the claims some people have made, it matters.

The first is ““The United States has done far more ‘testing’ than any other nation, by far!” Mr Trump said this on 25 March, when the latest official data showed that a total of 418,810 people had been tested in the US.” 418K over a population of 235,000,000? That is a little less than 0.1%, all whilst South Korea tested 0.7% of the entire population, as such South Korea exceeded testing by 700%, not a proud moment for the White House. 

The second one is important: “Mr Trump said he thought the true death rate, based on “my hunch”, was “way under 1%”.” That in a stage where 25% of all reported cases are in the US, whilst 136,000 people in the US died, a non-living rate of well over 4%, in this the White House was wrong by well over 400%, as such the numbers matter and as such the album, The Adventures of Moon Man and Slim Shady, will matter as well. We can throw numbers at you all night long, but the reality is that we need to take notice and we need to take action. And should you disagree then I say fine, do that, and if you die my value merely increases. We can go that way too, so in light of the stage where the words of a rapper actually have direct global meaning, we need to take notice of the casual approach that politicians have shown to have. 

This is not about bashing President Trump (a mere added bonus), the global political stage is weird and irresponsible as to how they perceive the state of the global stage to be, the fact that all these political ‘heavyweights’ are shown to be largely inferior to the Prime Minister of New Zealand (Jacinda Arden), a (rather small) nation that according to the Facebook Image is not linked to the rest of the world, should shows us all just how serious matters have become. 

We have ignored at the impressions of some people, whilst the stage was serious, it was deadly and that needs to be reflected, again and again like it is a lesson from the Teletubbies, as I personally see it team Eminem-Kid Cudi might optionally be a little late, but they are there a lot faster than some of these so called ‘serious politicians’, we the people have a problem and we need to realise it a lot faster than we are, our lives actually depend on it at present.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media

The cornered bully

We all have these moments, when we have to speak out against dopey (the bully in the corner) but the boss we report to is a spineless sack of shit and he will not do anything, more importantly he seems to be heralding the voice of the bully like he has credibility. So there we are, the bully (America), the spineless boss (pretty much most nations in the EU and the Commonwealth) and the people ready to speak out, the IT experts who are muzzled by bosses, because they are afraid to start a fight.

That is the setting that the Guardian introduces us to with ‘Using Huawei in UK 5G networks would be ‘madness’, US says‘ (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/13/using-huawei-in-uk-5g-networks-would-be-madness-us-says). We have seen it before, the US is now getting more and more afraid of the billions being missed out on and they are going full throttle with the fear mongering. Even as we see “Matt Pottinger, presented an incendiary dossier which they said featured new evidence of the security risks of relying on Huawei technology in future phone networks“, we get introduced to the Gerbil-in-the-groceries Matt Pottinger the new flagship for presenting ‘news’ just like Colin Powell with his Silver briefcase. You see, I am not afraid to face that music, neither are the hundreds of intrusion experts who have been unable to validate the wild fantasies of America, America took the VHS example and is trying to steer the ships of nations and now they are boasting an unwillingness to share intelligence. This is nice, but in the end, the Intelligence from the US is backdated and there is every chance that it is as false as any news they spread. The entire bully network comes to blows when we see “The intense and public lobbying presents an immediate headache for Boris Johnson“, I also do not disregard “having been repeatedly advised by the UK’s security establishment that any security risks can be contained“, this is equally important, because Alex Younger who is the official Big Boss at MI-6 stated that infrastructure this important should not leave British hands, this is not a case of Huawei being a danger, it is a national policy and that is fine, I would even state that this gives the UK and option to buy the Huawei technology, rip it apart, set it under a loop and optionally give BT a chance to become a contender, US firms will jump at that opportunity, to have Huawei technology without the Huawei fear. Let’s face it, Huawei offered that solution to the US last year, but there is a larger concern and for the US it is not really spying, it is the fear where data will end and there are several new players all non-American whilst the American data gatherers are tapped out (financially), so the US is bullying all others to wait hoping that Silicon Valley will come with an American solution that is actually real 5G, all whilst it is not coming and at present all those who delay are losing momentum and twice the amount of time on the 5G path, so any delay up to a year means a 2 year delay and they all know that you are either better (the US is not), you are first (the US can not) or you cheat (the only path the US has at present). 

This all gives us two distinct realities, the first is that for the first time the US is not the first at the top in technology, a shock they have a hard time surpassing and they are not the only 5G company, they are really not ready for real 5G, you see in my past blogs I showed that whatever they call 5G is really not 5G, nowhere near, not at those speeds. The Guardian also gives us “Ahead of the UK decision the head of MI5, Andrew Parker, said over the weekend that he saw “no reason to think” that using Huawei technology should threaten intelligence sharing with the US“, Mr Parker is right, but mainly because the quality of US intelligence is seemingly fading, they are losing sources all over the Middle East and they have too little in the Far East, as such we lose out on a source that is mostly redundant. Mr Parker’s assertion is in opposition to “a senior US official who was part of the delegation, who said: “Congress has made it clear they will want an evaluation of our intelligence sharing.”“, two parts are shown here, the fact that the bullying continue and the fact that this ‘senior US official‘ is left nameless, just like the fact that this matter is on the desk of a deputy national security advisor. In the age where America goes to vote next year, no one wants to burn their fingers and their career on this, and when the truth comes out (and it will) their careers are gone in the international field and the national field no longer has the juicy options it once had. 

When we get to “The officials, who had flown in specially from the US, would not spell out what the “relatively recent information” that they had shared with their UK counterparts was“, it is all a load of HogWash (American expression), you see, If there was any actual danger the US would spread it like a wildfire to EVERY security IT Consultant, but they did not and the news is flat on that. What we do get is ‘Facebook and Google are as much of a threat as Huawei‘ (source: Marketwatch) where we see “Facebook is already undermining the democratic process, including in the U.S. itself, where the platform has facilitated foreign interference in elections.

 

In addition, Facebook has fueled division and fear, and refused to remove hate speech, Holocaust denial and anti-Semitic posts. The platform has been described as a “megaphone for hate” against Muslims, and it is accused of facilitating a genocide against the Rohingya in Myanmar. For these reasons, the British actor and comedian Sacha Baron Cohen recently called Facebook “the greatest propaganda machine in history.”” This is true but it is only he side effect of the matter, the real issue is not there it is seen in “these threats already exist, because Facebook (which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp) and Google (which owns YouTube) have an astonishingly comprehensive range of data about their users — their location, contacts, messages, photos, downloads, searches, preferences, purchases, and much else” It is not the porridge, it is the spoon, the data is everything and as the data no longer merely flow to America, but it will flow to China as well (via aps and so on) in a larger growing slice it will no longer flow to the US, that is the real fear, it will impact all firms relying on data and that is the real ticket and it will have an impact sizing up to billions of dollars every year, it is a larger impact as data becomes the new currency. I will go as far as setting the stage that the IP I had designed will impact it even further for the globally based 400 million small business firms. Even as America sneers at the little guy, they are the foundation of data, not Google and not Facebook, they are merely the facilitators not the creators. That reality is now up for grabs in more than one way. If it was really all about security, the news would have picked up to a much larger degree to ‘Cisco critical bugs: Nexus data center switch software needs patching now‘ with the added text “Cisco has disclosed a dozen bugs affecting its Data Center Network Manager (DCNM) software, including three critical authentication-bypass bugs that expose enterprise customers to remote attacks” (source: ZDNet), this is not the first time, I gave more info months ago when at least one such an issue woke up and whilst all are screaming about 5G security and feigned Chinese values, they all ignore the Elephant in the room (Cisco), I do believe that it was an honest mistake, there was no ill practice at work (from the side of Cisco), but there is a larger concern and those security advisors connected to the Oval office do not seem to care (or optionally merely not comprehend), it is a larger issue that is impacting the Fortune 500, but the press is blind to it. In support there is also ‘A Cisco Router Bug Has Massive Global Implications‘ (source: Wired) with the added information “The devices play a pivotal role at institutions, in other words, including some that deal with hypersensitive information. Now, researchers are disclosing a remote attack that would potentially allow a hacker to take over any 1001-X router and compromise all the data and commands that flow through it. And it only gets worse from there“, which was given to us last May, with the almost complete rundown by researchers from the security firm Red Balloon. And the added information “Once the researchers gain root access, they can bypass the router’s most fundamental security protection. Known as the Trust Anchor, this Cisco security feature has been implemented in almost all of the company’s enterprise devices since 2013“, this is the setting, an impact that is global and the US is keeping it quiet, yet the unproven stage without any real evidence is heralded to the max, which gives the larger implication that this is about data and about the financial security of the US, and why should we pay for that? They were flaccid for years, they refused to innovate and China started to innovate, even as we see in the Guardian article that the kit from Huawei “cheaper and more advanced than rivals“, we see one part, the fact that the US has nothing to counter what Huawei offers is the larger concern (for America), they are 2-3 years behind and that implies that they have nothing to enter the field with until 2025 and become a real contender, at which point Huawei is the new standard and as such data will flow via Huawei and not via American solutions, the data loss for America will be to some degree crippling. their revenue from advertisement, their revenue from data sale and other revenues liked to that are all impacted, it could cost the US 50-150 billion in the foreseeable future and that is where the US fear kicks in, their debt is out of control and that amount would have a much larger impact on the infrastructure that can no longer be paid for, one system after another will fail, a cascade of systems all collapsing because the US has no reserves left, the EU is also out of reserves and they see the 5G part as essential to surpass American firms and most need to contend with spineless politicians and long winded ‘talks’ by the EU gravy train, the are all in it for the money and commercial EU is seeing it all come apart, they can hold on if they get the 5G edge, an option that the US dreads. 

As such the cornered bully is getting more brazen, relying on past tactics that exploded in everyone’s face and they are still doing it, hoping that they can get away with it the second time around, optionally they will rely on other technologies, as long as they are not Chinese, it is not the hardware, it is the data. Ericsson gives us “5G is designed for industrial applications. This means that falling behind on 5G as a platform for innovation will jeopardize the European industrial base. With two global vendors based in Europe, the continent has the prerequisite to lead” (they merely fail to inform us (for valid reasons) that the two players are Ericsson and Nokia, but their solutions are almost two full generations behind Huawei, they would need two years to upgrade and that is what they face, they were all asleep at the wheel and now that the ferryman wants to get paid for all the time they were asleep, they are no longer willing to foot the bill, 4G is almost at a break even point and that is stopping most to go forward, even as they see that 5G is going to take over, they are all afraid that the next iteration of hardware is just beyond the horizon. And they are still setting larger foundations for themselves, because the real cash is the data, not the hardware and that is the stage where they all need to select an optional new provider, the devil you know beats the devil you know not and they want their coins. 

In all this the bully in the corner is getting more and more aggravated and we see that, but they did this to themselves, when I can surpass the US in IP (something I never thought possible) that is the point you need to realise where the US failed, their IP is just not there and they have no real counters other than the Silver Briefcase scenario hoping it will buy them enough time.  You see, when we accept the foundation of one quote: ‘5G Antenna Market was estimated to be US$ 9,835.0 Mn in 2018 and is expected to reach US$ 34,720.1 Mn by 2027 growing at a CAGR of 15.5% over the Forecast Period Owing to the Evolution of Smart Antennas‘, we see what the US is missing out of, the antennas alone are setting the stage of 9-15 billion each year surpassing my estimation of 50 billion value by 2022, yet that is merely the antenna’s, Huawei launched their 5G routers last week and that is where the money becomes a serious setting. When we combine the stage offered “The power of the chipset enables the router to be the first to support commercial application of 4G and 5G dual-modes. It is the first to have the capacity to perform to industry benchmarks of peak 1.65Gbps@100MHz download speeds” with “LTE Advanced has been available for several years now and some carriers (notably AT&T in the US) are calling it 5Ge, or 5G Evolution, even though it is most definitely not an official 5G standard, but rather the latest iteration of 4G” (source: Forbes) you get to see how dire the US situation is for the US, they claim to be 5G and they are not, they claim that Huawei is a danger and they cannot prove that it is, the data is everything and they are at an ever growing risk to lose large chunks of it. Now that Huawei is forced towards their Harmony OS, we will see a growing non US population switching, meaning that the data is no longer going to the US in a readable format. That is the larger loss for the US and they are getting close to desperate. 

In my view, that is the consideration of dumping the brains that they needed and that is the consequence of a flaccid business path, down the track it tends to cost and the US is scared of that moment, hoping to scare all others, we see that the EU is considering their options and as the US loses nation after nation we see  larger stage, when the data surpasses into national hands again, they will not care about US substandard intelligence, most will have their own and a new generation of apps will be adopted by its users on a global scale.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

Double Standards

You might have heard of this new tech company in China, it makes all kinds of telecom stuff and they are known as Huawei. What is interesting is that we got a lecture by Alex Younger (fearless leader MI-6), he was all about the fact that at no time a national infrastructure should be done by a foreign nation, now as reasons go, this is a decent one, there is no need for evidence, it is about national interest. I was not in favour, but I do not set British policy (apparently) and as such I believe that it is an acceptable view.

In that light I have a hard time looking (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50879809), where we are treated to ‘Cobham takeover: Boris Johnson defends £4bn sale to US equity firm‘, so we see a stage where British national security concerns are now going through an equity firm putting Wall Street in charge of a large chunk of British Defense. Can anyone explain that to me?

The US has one directive, serve the needs for the US and the US only, then we get Wall Street where profit is the run of the coast, so at what point was selling Cobham to any other nation a good idea?

Even as we see the statement from Boris Johnson “A lot of checks have been gone through to make sure that in that particular case all the security issues that might be raised can be satisfied and the UK will continue to be a very, very creative and dynamic contributor to that section of industry and all others“, I wonder if proper checks have been made from situations that are in opposition, the entire Yemeni war and the position of the US Congress is an apt description. Admiral Lord West was concerned and not without reason.

Issues like:

The risk of “unauthorised persons” obtaining information about the MoD’s capabilities and activity is a big one, keeping secrets in the US and on Wall Street is a challenge at the best of times and this will bite the UK before 2030, optionally before 2022. 

The threat to existing MoD programmes (due to funding cuts or moving capabilities “off-shore”), more important, whatever is done to keep the invoices low will be an affront to Wall Street an equity managers, so they will oppose whatever options the MoD finds to lower invoices. Then there is the other issue, do you think that ANY equity firm will pay £4,000,000,000 unless they can get at least double out of it? So where is that marging coming from? There is no way that this was merely for the nicety, it is an equity firm and I get that, yet what business are we in when governments hand over control of defense contractors and the power that they have within the MoD to a foreign nation? It does not rhyme and we see an absence from MI-6 setting that stage correctly (and optionally openly). 

I also believe that the moment things do go South, the people in the UK will dress up like angry villagers and quarrel their settlement with pikes and pitchforks with Business Secretary Andrea Leadsom who was kind enough to validate “she was satisfied the risks that had been identified had been mitigated “to an acceptable level”” you see an acceptable level is a subjective term and of course it will bite and probably whilst she is still in office. I am also interested in the fact that a Business Secretary sets the stage for national defence, was that her job? And I am completely with Admiral Lord West on this one, which issues had been mitigated? How were they mitigated and why was mitigation a point of discussion in the first place. 

There is another side, the side of the equity firm (advent) and in this case Shonnel Malani who states “We are confident the transaction and undertakings being given on national security, jobs and future investment, provide important long-term assurances for both Cobham’s employees and customers, particularly in the UK and also globally“, these words when you look deeper take no consideration of stock and change of stock, this is a statement of people, data and hardware are not considered in this, and perhaps the government looked at it, but I wonder to what degree. Consider the complete data branch of Cobham Airborne Surveillance not having one storage location, but now also is handed to the US data farms for intel grinding. That would be worth a pretty penny, would it not? And lets not forget, Cobham is a global player, so advent will get doors open all over the alphabet group (as well as alphabet). There is a lot of intelligence in Cobham and the deciding factor of where it goes is now in the hands of a Wall Street pleaser. 

I checked (at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-update-on-the-proposed-acquisition-of-cobham-plc-by-advent-international) and I was right, again we see “After meetings with the parties, advice from the Defence Secretary and carefully considering the consultation responses, Ms Leadsom has made the decision that the undertakings offered by the parties mitigate the national security risks identified to an acceptable level. She has therefore accepted the undertakings that were consulted on“, yet there is no protection of data as far as I can tell, the owners can get access to it to the largest degree. Even after Brexit, Advent can sell it to Strasbourg, leaving the UK with less options in the long run, a shortsighted response and I do personally hope that  Andrea Leadsom gets to personally deal with the cloud of angry villagers when failures come out (she is likely to be on the next plane to the US for granting this merger).

I also liked the idea that Mrs Leadsom had added “meticulously thought over” in several places. The consideration of it tends to lead towards parts no one thought off. You see, the fact that an equity firm agrees to a £4,000,000,000 caper indicates that there is a 20%-30% to be gained annually, which in the end in the long lasting set would not have made sense so sell at all, so we go towards other venues that Cobham allows for, data is one (yet not the only one), available stock is the other one. It is called vulturing, yet when we realise that there could be up to £ 6,000,000,000 in valued hardware the 30% is easily reached and over three years Cobham would be in a worse state, that last one is speculation, yet is it far fetched? Consider WHO is buying and the government as well as the stockholders are OK with it does not sit well with me. There is a truckload of value that we underestimate in any firm. We might accept “provide important long-term assurances for both Cobham’s employees and customers, particularly in the UK and also globally“, it sounds nice, but what happens when their workload doubles because Cobham ends up doing service for another player who becomes part of Cobham? Selling off was checked, yet adding inferior players to cobham seemingly was not. I look at it because the buyer is an equity firm and I tend to not trust them, I merely trust their need for greed and when they decide, they have a larger play to make profits, yet in that game there is always a victim, it is close to a given, I merely want to make sure that British defense is not that victim. 

I believe that Cobham grew well beyond the vision of Sir Alan Cobham and that is fine, but I reckon that in this case the UK government did not really “meticulously thought over” several factors and it worries me, whenever greedy firms get into a defense branch defense, the defense group tends to lose and that is never good.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Military, Politics